Let us now praise famous men  if we can. There are two reasons you dont
need to know anything about Mike (even his name is a fraud) King, to know that we should
not be celebrating a holiday in his name. First, a respectable time needs to pass after a
man dies, during which the facts will mature. After sober reflection has considered them,
a national clamor will spontaneously call such an honor into being  it if is
deserved.

To force such a holiday into law soon after a man dies, almost gasping in haste as in
an emergency, using intimidation and threats, is unseemly to say the least; but that is
how the present farce we uncelebrate was arranged. Need we add that this principle applies
to any man, whatever his name, whatever his color.

The second reason proves ipso facto that the "Martin
Luther" King holiday is a fraud. The only American who used to be so honored 
the only one  was George Washington himself, the Father of our country, because
sober reflection on the facts proved he deserved it.

Since then, George Washington has been demoted. Look at your calendar. His birthday has
been submerged in "Presidents Day," with the result that the only American
honored with a holiday all his own is Mike King. Even if you knew nothing about him before
you started reading this, the obvious question should erupt from your monitor: Does this
man  does any American  deserve to be honored above Washington?

Mike was said to be an apostle of Mohandas K. Gandhis non-violence. Many
Americans at the time wondered why it was that, wherever King went, violence erupted. He
explained it himself, in a piece he wrote for Saturday Review (April 3, 1965), in
which he set forth the four steps of his technique.

"1. Nonviolent demonstrators go into the streets to exercise their constitutional
rights. 2. Racists resist by unleashing violence against them. 3. Americans of conscience
in the name of decency demand federal intervention and legislation. 4. The administration,
under mass pressure, initiates measures of immediate intervention and remedial
legislation."

Remember, this is not something we are accusing him of. Mike King wrote this himself.
Notice that step two of his formulation calls for violence. The reason violence broke out
wherever he went was that violence was what he went into the streets to get. His
lieutenants would do things in the target city deliberately designed to drive normal human
beings berserk.

What would you do if you looked out your bay window some glorious morning and saw
someone peeing on your lawn? What would you do if you saw a couple there enjoying sex?
What would you do if you were a mounted policeman and someone tried to disembowel your
horse?

The Communist Broadcasting System, etc., would not record this, but it would broadcast
graphic coverage of what you did when you went crazy, with the logical result that
fair-minded people around the country believed you attacked the "nonviolent
demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights" for no reason. This was a
typical King "nonviolent" demonstration.

I participated in a modest effort to defuse some of this, as the only white member of a
strike team that would travel to a targeted town and explain the scheme before Mikes
terrorists arrived to foment animosity. For instance, King chose Sandersville, Georgia as
a target and Julia Brown and I went there to do what we could.

Mrs. Brown had served as an F.B.I. undercover agent for many years in Cleveland. (This
was the original, American F.B.I., not todays terrorist gang that commits mass
murder of Americans and has merged with the Soviet KGB.) Julia and I worked together many
times. She would delight in telling people I was her grandson, which raised some eyebrows
among people too polite to ask how a black lady could have a grandson as white as Herman
Talmadge.

When we arrived, Sandersville was simmering. Kings men had already provoked so
much tension that it would have been dangerous to bring the black and white residents
together to the same hall to hear us. So, we spoke to them on two consecutive evenings,
one evening to the blacks, the other to the whites.

We told them what this man King was, which organizations and people he worked with and
fronted for, how he did it and what his purpose was. We explained that he was trying to
divide the races and foment violence in behalf of his bosses who had more contempt for
Negroes, as people of color then were known, than the worst racist concocted by the
perfervid imagination of Harriet Beecher Stowe

And, mirabile dictu, the tension dissipated. The people of Sandersville,
Georgia, black and white, united in understanding who their true enemy was. Kings
revolutionaries left. There was no riot. Later, Congressman Larry McDonald, the Georgia
Democrat, invited Julia and me to testify against the proposed holiday for Mike. My
beautiful "grandmother" and I flew together to the District of Criminals for the
purpose. Julia testified that while she was a Party member, she "knew Martin Luther
King to be closely connected with the Communist Party."

Mrs. Brown became a one-woman truth squad. When word arrived about the next town King
planned to terrorize, she would go there first and talk to the townspeople of both races
who were willing to listen. Mikes scheme would fizzle. So effective was she at
exposing what Mike really was, so discredited and ineffective did he become, I worried
that his Communist bosses might have him killed. As a martyr, he would be much more
valuable to them than he had become.

Wanting Mike to remain alive and ineffective, I warned my colleagues of my fear, hoping
that sufficient publicity could neutralize the threat, but a few weeks later he was dead,
killed by the usual "lone assassin." As usual, there was "no
conspiracy." There never is. Waving a shirt he said was drenched with Kings
blood (it wasnt), Jesse Jackson, who said he cradled the dying King in his arms (he
didnt), launched a career selling "protection," that no doubt has turned Cosa
Nostra black with envy.

So, what was "Martin Luther" King, Jr.? Please look at the piece I did a
year ago on the subject, which you will find in the archives of etherzone.com. He was
a Communist. For proof of this, look, for just one example, at my book, Its Very
Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights (Boston, Western Island, 1965), which sold half
a million copies.

Its Very Simple talks about Bayard Rustin, Kings sodomite
"secretary," who spent his entire life in Communist Party activities, and who
demanded that "more bloody Negro suffering should be encouraged so that squeamish
Northern Negroes would be horrified into line. . . ." There was also a man named
Hunter Pitts ODell, who ran Kings organization. ODell was a member of
the national committee of the Communist Party. The media of the time kept exposing
ODell and Mike kept pretending to fire him, but ODell later would turn up
elsewhere in Kings apparatus.

But the thing that has always amused me is that, after the book was published, we
learned much more about Kings Communist and other activities than we knew before. I
had to write many magazine articles to catch up. For instance, when I wrote Its
Very Simple I did not yet know about Stanley Levison.

Suddenly, King started to make speeches about the war in Vietnam. Well meaning
Americans scratched their heads. The war took him far afield from "civil
rights," and his speeches sounded like enemy propaganda cooked up in Hanoi. The
reason was that Stanley Levison was writing those speeches. So who was Stanley Levison?

Stanley was the paymaster in this country for the KGB, the Soviet secret police. The
KGB would send Stanley the rubles to pay for all Soviet activities in the United States,
and he would distribute the money. How high up in the Soviet apparatus would you have to
be  how much would the KGB have to trust you  to get that job? Stanley
Levison, of the KGB, financed Mike King and wrote his speeches.

I also did not yet know that "Dr." King was a consummate plagiarist, who
stole enormous chunks of other peoples work. Anyone else doing that to such an
extent would be summarily stripped of his doctorate, but "Dr." King is more than
equal. (See George Orwells Animal Farm.) He also turns out to have been a
world-class womanizer, maybe even surpassing his protector, Jack Kennedy. Remember that
King was allegedly a preacher of the gospel.

The giveaway to all this is that even Kings admirers  unable to staunch the
extrusion of treason and filth  reluctantly admit it. See for instance the work of
Professor David J. Garrow, certainly a sympathetic King scholar. This is the record of the
man our Communist leaders in the District of Criminals have even elevated above
Washington.

Ill be talking about King for the entire two hours on my radio show on Monday.
Compare what I tell you to what every other host on the radio says. Simply go to my
website, http://www.stangbooks.com/, click on
Network Talk Radio and click on Listen. I also have a few copies of the first and second
editions of the paperback Its Very Simple available. They are
"new," but remember that they are almost 40 years old and somewhat yellowed and
faded. Call the North Hollywood American Opinion Bookstore, 800 470-8783.

Alan Stang has been a network radio talk show host and was one of
Mike Wallace's first writers. He was a senior writer for American Opinion magazine
and has lectured around the world for more than 30 years. He is also the author of ten
books, including, most recently, Perestroika Sunset, surrounding our Government's
deception in the POW/MIA arena. If you would like him to address your group, please email
what you have in mind. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.Alan Stang can be reached at:feedback@stangbooks.com